And this isn't even right, 2 people founded Tesla the other 3 are investors....
this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2023
295 points (76.7% liked)
Technology
58206 readers
3637 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Careful, Musk might send the internet goon squad after you for saying that. He gets very upset if you call him an investor in Tesla.
Starlink is trash too, come at me Elon
Starlink is shitty and yet where I'm at its still easily the cheapest, fastest, and most reliable option. Infuriating really.
Yeah, if he spent the money on laying fibre instead of using satilites that need to be replaced every at most 18 months and as little as 2 months, everyone would have been better off.
Yeah and if my province hadn't sold of their public telephone company to private investors I'd be even more better off so I'm more pissed about that.
Gotta love when rich people convince our politicians that they can do the job better than the Govt and then we loose everything. Like when Brian M sold off CN Rail now Bill Gates is making billions from it.
Yeah, but he only has the one digger, so the fiber would all end up in hyperloop-sized tunnels, it'd be like the Underminer from the Incredibles.
Prob would still be cheaper and more environmentally friendlier
I see that being said quite often.
Is there any actual proof of this or is it speculation?
In low density population areas, it seems to me that laying fiber would be cost prohibitive, but I'd like to be proven wrong.
Each satellite is worth 250k @ 5,500 units currently (and its still garbage unless its your only option). And this is just the cost of satilites
Worse case scenario for laying fibre is $80,000 for 1 mile
You do the shit maths and that is 17,187.5 miles (not km) of fibre for what is currently in LEO and excluding the price of launching these POS into the nights sky. So for best case senario every 18 months that is how much fibre lines Elon could be laying.
From Presque Isles, Maine to Sandiego, California is 3,305 miles
The internet has ruined me, because I read goon squad and thought of the other 'gooning'.
You don't them after you either.
I dont understand
I accidentally a word.
Understandable, have a day
Excuse me, but one of the conditions of Elon's investment was that they pretend he was a founder and refer to him as such!
It wasn't a condition of his initial investment, but rather of a lawsuit settlement five years later, in 2009 (six years after Eberhard and Tarpenning actually founded it).
Tesla only had two founders, Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning. They even write that in the first paragraph. Especially Elon Musk pretty much bought himself the title co-founder despite joining much later. This is just Elon fanboyism.
Yes. That is what happens when you sell the majority of your business.
the world’s most valuable automotive company.
Lol no.
I don't like ~~Tesla~~ Elon.
But they are literally the most valuable automotive company.
As of right now, their market cap is $794.33 billion.
Yeah I was a bit surprised. Seems quite clearly over-valued.
By Revenue Tesla is 11th, and by Earnings Tesla is 8th. Market cap is fictional number.
Market cap is absolutely the best metric for the "value" of a company.
If people are willing to pay $X for a share of a company and there are N shares, then the value of the company is $X*N.
The fact that people are buying shares at a certain price says that people think the company is valued at that price.
It is A metric of the company, best could be argued, absolutely best is stretching it. When company value is based on hype, over promise and lies etc, the market cap becomes less relevant and the revenue/profit are better metrics for valuation.
Theranos was valued at 9B$, just based on hype and lies.
Elon Musk is similar vaporware sales man.
This reminds me of a funny (probably illegal) thing that Max Fosh did where he made a company with an absurd amount of shares and got some random person to buy a share for $20 or $50 or something so his company temporarily became the richest in the world (technically) lol
"Unlucky cofounders" - the lowest net worth of any of them is 7 million. Ian's not doing half bad considering most people will work their entire lives and not get a net worth even half of his.
The next one up has a net worth of 200 million.
This seems extremely poorly researched.
I was never interested in following up claims that Musk was not a founder, but to the extent this article is fair, I’d say he earned the title of founder as well as being the wealthiest. Maybe he was the only one who could afford to go all in on Tesla, but the fact is he went all in on Tesla and put arguably the most into building it into a car manufacturer
And they all look extremely rich to me. Even the “poorest” of the group made $7M for one year
7 million is "retiring doctor" or "retiring Google engineer" rich.
It's generally considered safe to withdraw 4% of your nest egg the first year, and adjust that for inflation moving forwards. $7 million can sustain a $280k/year retirement. That's certainly rich, but there's a world of difference between that and a billionaire. A billionaire can safely spend $40 million a year.
“I made this!”